The latest Sports Illustrated has a good story on the Avalanche and its fast start, written by Sarah Kwak. Titled “Mile High Makeover”, it’s a good piece that has an interesting item about Evgeniya Vavrinyuk, whose allegations against Avalanche goalie Semyon Varlamov has led to a formal charge of misdemeanor third-degree assault by the Denver District Attorney.

Kwak called Vavrinyuk’s attorney, Robert Abrams, and, to quote from the piece:

When contacted by SI on Nov. 5 about the possibility of interviewing his client, Abrams asked, “What kind of fee are you offering?” When told SI does not pay for interviews, he replied, “Oh, O.K. She’s a little tired from giving interviews. I’m sure you can understand. Thanks so much for the call.” He then hung up.

A couple weeks ago, a story came out on a Russian website called Life News, where Vavrinyuk gave a Skype interview and said many of the same things she said in a previous media interview that included The Denver Post. Full disclosure: I’ve done work for SI before too, and had an idea the item about Abrams asking about a fee would be coming out in the magazine. I later talked to Abrams soon after the Life News interview came out, and I asked him if his client was paid by Life News. He said he wasn’t going to answer that. I wasn’t going to disclose that until the SI story came out because it was their scoop, and now it has.

Does the fact that the Vavrinyuk camp has, at least according to one national magazine, asked to be paid for her story hurt her credibility? That’s up to others to determine I guess. The fact of the matter is, though: Varlamov is facing a real charge from a real district attorney.

It’s no secret, not tough to figure out what the Varlamov camp says: that Vavryinyuk made up her story to get money from Varlamov. Abrams says the pictures of bruises to her client are indisputable, and that any other person out there with a theory on this case is an “incompetent witness”, because they weren’t there.

So, the case continues on. What will happen? I don’t know, but this is still a big story around the team – as much as everyone around it tries to pretend it isn’t.

If Varlamov takes a plea deal – as some close to the case think – he will obviously admit to something and be subject to whatever sanctions agreed to by the parties involved and the court. If he admits to something as part of a plea deal, then he’ll be subject a further possible civil suit by Vavrinyuk. Agreeing to something might also subject Varlamov to further discipline by the Avs and/or the NHL. And, it could jeopardize his possible participation in the Olympics in Sochi – something Varlamov wants badly to achieve.

Taking a “deal” would theoretically make the whole thing go away (except for a probable settlement of a civil suit), but it would possibly come with some other heavy prices as described above. And it would make the Avs look a bit bad, for placing their faith in him and continuing to play him. Keep in mind: when people compare Varlamov’s situation to that of Patrick Roy back in 2001 with his ex-wife, they are forgetting that Roy was never formally charged. Varlamov has been formally charged.

If Varlamov goes to trial, he could be fully vindicated by a jury. But, obviously, he would take the risk of being found guilty and be subject to a harsher penalty – which could include jail. And, going to trial means a lot more time, expense and potential distraction for him and the team in an ongoing season.

The Avs are keeping a wary eye on all this, of course. It will certainly be interesting to see how this plays out.

I’m not sure this gives any indication to whether or not she is lying, but it certainly doesn’t help. My question is how you can be stupid enough to do something like this when you’re being portrayed as a gold digger? Her attorney doesn’t seem to be very bright.

Either way, I’ll wait it out and see what comes of it. No way of knowing who is lying right now, but this and the fact the DA had to drop the charges way down, don’t look very good for her.

Smell the Glove

“My question is how you can be stupid enough to do something like this when you’re being portrayed as a gold digger?”

I’m not sure that’s fair. The alleged victims will always be portrayed as gold diggers at some point by someone. That’s what makes it tough for legitimate victims to come forward. If you’ve been abused and have done nothing wrong, you then get to face scrutiny and some form of public shaming just for stepping forward to defend yourself.

I’m not sure if asking for money for interviews is not considered kosher or what in this case. Maybe Dater could shed some light. It does seem on the tacky side but at the same time, legal bills coming in and all that.

Guest

But I think (and this is purely speculation on my part) the real goal of all of this is a civil suit, not the criminal charges. I can’t remember where, but I believe at some point early on there was a quote from her lawyer hinting at a civil suit (if anyone can find the quote that would be awesome). And, sorry, but a civil suit screams “gold digger.” I know, a civil suit in a case like this is common (money for damages, lawyers, etc) but it is just one of many factors that (in my unimportant opinion) hurts her credibility and makes it seem like she’s after a payday.

tigervixxxen

She was giving interviews hours after calling the police and has continued to do paid for interviews. No, a victim accusing an athelete does not make them a gold digger but her behavior is fair to question especially since she has said herself numerous occasions how Varly left her with nothing.

Smell the Glove

It’s a hockey blog, we’re barely qualified to discuss that around these parts, so sure it’s absolutely fair to question anything about this case since most of us aren’t lawyers (or out of 3rd grade coughenzosincough).

I was just saying in and of itself, this didn’t seem like the most questionable detail of this case when it comes to what she has alleged.

shaker

We don’t even have any evidence that she or her attorney asked for a fee. Nothing beyond here say anyway.

Smell the Glove

Technically the hearsay we have is they asked if there was a fee which to me is a bit different from asking for one.

shaker

Technically,yes. Let’s also remember that the attorney may have an interest in her receiving a fee as well.

Cougs_suck

“When contacted by SI on Nov. 5 about the possibility of interviewing his client, Abrams asked, “What kind of fee are you offering?” When told SI does not pay for interviews, he replied, “Oh, O.K. She’s a little tired from giving interviews. I’m sure you can understand. Thanks so much forthe call.” He then hung up.”

If that’s not asking for a fee then what is it? SI called to ask for an interview, he asked what sort of fee they were offering and SI said none, he immediately became disinterested, gave an excuse, and then hung up. If they weren’t asking for a fee, why not set something up for another time?

If your argument is that we can’t trust SI then I’m not sure why you feel that way, I think SI is a pretty reputable source. It’s not the National Enquirer.

shaker

Without hearing the conversation,let alone the actual context, we are taking the word of the reporter that was turned down for an interview as absolute fact? That’s your choice but outside of tossing a bit of mud into the pool,the fact that her attorney asked for anything is sort of irrelevant.

Cougs_suck

You’re right and you’re doing the right thing by not assuming that this is true. We don’t know what happened and I could be absolutely wrong for believing SI, but it’s hard not to be swayed by it, and a lot of other people will be.

Which I guess speaks to my point that I think her attorney is handling this very poorly. If that’s not what happened then why leave it up to speculation?

I’m trying to stay as partial as I can, she’s just not painting herself in a very good light so far with the things we know. Varlamov has been quiet so he hasn’t had the chance to do that, she probably should have done the same outside of speaking to the police. Which in and of itself is highly questionable, why does she need to be doing these interviews? Just talk to the police and let them handle it, you talking to sports magazines is not going to help the police.

shaker

I don’t disagree that she and her attorney are handling the whole thing poorly. Nor do I think she is totally innocent, but when a persons character is being tried I’d rather it were in a venue where everybody is under oath.

tigervixxxen

His character is already being tried. It is fair to look at it from both sides. Of course none of us know anything for sure, nobody is disagreeing with that fact.

shaker

I’m not sure if I agree with you here,although lm also not sure how far into the weeds its worth going into.Admittedly at the start,literally the first day or two,there was quite a bit of speculation and name calling but since then,quite by design,the Varlamov camp,the Avs,the NHL,local and sports media etc. have mostly stepped into the cone of silence which works nicely to avoid any of their comments being “taken out of context”,or “misquoted” or the like. If we truly are looking “fairly” from both sides we would assume that Varlamov has something to hide,er I mean something to gain by staying silent. One would have to assume,after all,that he,the Avs and the NHL have more to gain by saying nothing,maybe having conversations with a certain DA,you know,general corporate protection stuff. The thing is that every interview his accuser does seems to find its way into the conversation no matter what language its in and then is scrutinized word by word,seemingly to make it fit a certain narrative. Who knows what really happened? She may be just another scam artist. On the other hand,he may have beaten her up a bit. The court of public opinion is an ugly,ugly place and I’m really not sure that things like this help…or matter if we’re being fair.

BD

Varlamov hasn’t been silent on this topic. He’s talked to Dater and Chambers briefly and they have published articles and blogs on this very website if you care to find out the little he has said about the situation.

shaker

I’ve read the articles on “this very website” and apart from “I’m completely innocent” and “my teammates support me” he hasn’t said anything of substance. Its his right and its a good bit of advice from his attorneys. Look,I don’t want Varlamov to be found guilty either. I’m just saying that one person puts something out there that reinforces a particular way of thinking and its taken as gospel. Why do you think that Mrs. Kwak put that into the piece? Granted its really all that there is to write,regarding the Varlamov situation,but would the article have been incomplete without it? Would anyone have even noticed? No,because its hearsay and nothing more and its there for the sole purpose of adding intrigue to a mostly dead storyline at the possible expense of a persons reputation.

BD

So you are accusing the reporter of lying? I’m fine with the reporter putting it into the story. It happened, it’s part of the situation, so why shouldn’t it be included?

shaker

No,I’m saying that no one knows IF it happened. And I’m saying that it was put into the story for the express purpose of swaying public opinion. And I’m saying that it is irrelevant.

Puck Me Up

“What kind of fee are you offering” doesn’t necessarily mean the fee was for HER to be compensated. Abrams is her attorney and I’m pretty sure he isn’t very interested in working for free if he can help it. With so many people wanting an interview at this point, I’m fairly certain her attorney has been in attendance for the majority of interviews she’s given thus far for simple fact that this is an ongoing legal matter, where the alleged victim needs to be careful about which questions she answers openly and which ones are being saved for the court room. Therefore, if her attorney did ask that question, I certainly can blame the guy for wanting to be compensated for his time.

Playing devil’s advocate for a moment, even if the fee was for her, again the same statement applies. I’m fairly certain she can’t afford to just drop what she’s doing to give an interview with an entity like SI who’s going to make a significant chunk of cash on a story like this. Why shouldn’t she be compensated for it? I think if any sports magazine is interested in this story, they SHOULD be willing to cough up some dough for the mere fact that they’re trying to capitalize on her alleged victimization. I think it’s pretty crappy of them to ask her for an interview without compensation.

Cougs_suck

I guess I don’t know how that’s unfair, if they’re going to be portrayed as that there’s nothing they can do about it. But you probably shouldn’t go out and do things that give credence to those accusations. I really don’t see how asking for money just to answer some questions is kosher. As far as Dater shedding light on it I think he did by posting this blog, it’s obviously not something that’s normal or it’d be a non story.

Smell the Glove

I know that what you’re saying is someone who doesn’t want a reputation as a gold digger should not reinforce that by asking for money to answer questions. That sounds like pretty sensible reasoning.

I’m saying that anyone that is going to accuse a celebrity is going to be accused of looking for money- that’s a given. What I’m saying 1.) is for all I know that’s common to receive compensation for interviews and 2.) she could need the money to retain representation. It could be maybe further complicated (expensive) by needing someone who speaks Russian.

As I said in another post I think there’s a lot to be dubious about here, but this particular part of it doesn’t seem the most noteworthy.

Cougs_suck

And that had crossed my mind, that maybe she’s hard up for money. I get what you’re saying, and I absolutely agree this isn’t the most noteworthy thing it’s just another part of it. I just don’t think it’s very smart on their parts to handle it this way if that’s not really the case. If it were me, I would be out in front of this instead of leaving it up to interpretation, I guess that’s why I don’t think her attorney is very smart.

Who knows though, I wouldn’t be surprised to see her do the interview now to try and change people’s opinions.

BD

I think I know who the lawyer is calling an incompetent witness, Evgenia’s former close friend Ellina Bandeeva. Ellina gave an interview to Life.ru that said Evgenia wants money from Varly and she was never abused. In fact she is the one with the drinking problem and has assaulted Varly in the past while drunk. In the recent incident, Ellina said that Evgenia was hitting Varly repeatedly, including in the mouth and he grabbed her wrists to make her stop and that’s how she got the bruise.

tigervixxxen

Wouldnt the lawyer be an incompetent witness as well because he wasn’t there either? It’s a pretty stupid thing for him to say. I doubt this gets resolved before Soci, that’s just two months away. If Varly does plea down it probably wouldn’t be a DV charge then. Harassment or something. NHL players have been convicted of far worse before, it would not make the Avs look bad for him to plea to something minor. It is no secret the girl needs money, she even said so herself.

Yo8

The girl also claims to have a friend as a “witness” but she wasn’t there either. I don’t know if that friend happens to be this ex-friend that is now willing to speak in favor of Varlamov but if she is, then that will be very interesting.

BD

No the ex-friend Ellina Bandeeva is in Russia.

Smell the Glove

Aside from money this case may provide an aspiring model notoriety.

I keep going back to the fact that in her very public statements she says Varlamov abused her in Russia and has a history of abusing her, but she had no recourse. Then evidently she moved to Hong Kong to be a model and Varlmov moved to the US, which would appear to me to be a way out of an abusive relationship- distance and employment, eliminating two of the traps of a typical cyclical abusive relationship. That could mean something or it could mean absolutely nothing. None of this removes the possibility that Varlamov is indeed guilty. It just doesn’t smell right to me though.

a__________________z

Thus begins the smear campaign

mrfxx

Didn’t the smear campaign begin as soon as the media published “her side” without verifying ANYTHING? For instance, she claims abuse occurred in other countries: while I accept that Russian media may have “covered up” anything which happened there, she also claim an incident in the Maldives, which I am guessing would (a) have at least looked into drunk and disorderly charges against him (dropped or not) and (b) would most likely have paparazzi which would would have covered any celebrities. The paper also didn’t question her comment that she only pressed charges because when she came back to their shared home, she found out that he had put all her stuff out – I understand that abuse victims tolerate behavior that most of us wouldn’t; however, was this reporting abuse – or retaliation because he kicked her out? As I said – the media started the smear campaign ….

Heinz Doofenshmirtz

It usually turns ugly when love becomes a game of “gimme gimme gimme”…

pascalp

I don’t know more than anyone else here who is lying or not but I can tell you a few things :
During this interview to Life she refused to show her bruising (on the advice of her attorney that apparently was sitting very close) despite saying it was still hurting and anytime she was asked a real question she was just saying she did not understand (or at least before having her lawyer’s adivce). At the end she cut the interview because the journalist became too pressing on her previous relationships.

Yesterday she was the guest of a show on a Russian channel and on the question :”How could you immediately afford a lawyer in the US if you had no money ?” she answered : “I don’t know” and after a couple other questions from a Russian lawyer she could not answer she just left the video conference.

I don’t know who is guilty but her attitude is very suspect. Mostly everyone in Russia, and my Russian wife, are believing she is just a “cheap slut looking to get money from a star…”

Yo8

Do you have a link of this?

pascalp

Unfortunately not, details about this talk show she attended where given live by my stepmother but it was broadcasted only in Russia.

BD

Here is the link to the show, but it’s all in Russian. Evgenia also has her sister on in her defense. For Varly, his dad was on the show, along with his BFF and his BFF’s mom, and his Loko youth hockey coach and someone else from Yaroslavl.

I would love for someone to translate what was discussed on this show.

Refusing to display bruises and injuries that are to be evidence in a criminal trial is not really out of the ordinary at all, nor is ending an interview when an attorney deems the questions to be getting off the subject.

She may be a woman just out to get some money, but Varly may also be an abusive guy who injured his girlfriend. The rush by so many to label the girlfriend as a greedy, gold-digging slut is a huge part of the reason domestic abuse is still so prevalent: people make excuses for the abuser and help him cover his tracks. I really wish all those who are saying “wait until the trial” were applying that logic both ways, but most are not.

Hobbes09

DA is less prevalent today and most definitely less acceptable than it has ever been. Besides close friends of the accused, no one stands behind the accused and tries to offer support. If anything, I would argue people tend to demonize the accused more than victimize them. DA is a much deeper issue than “My buddies will cover me so why not?”. And a lot of times, short of murder, friends will often try and cover for their friends, regardless of the crime. That being said, I like that there’s a discussion about both possibilities, but hate the use of the word slut to describe her, especially if it’s discovered she was telling the truth. Most people that abuse their spouses, come from families where spouses were abused or where abuse was accepted. It’s similar to racism in that it’s taught to be acceptable, or at least tolerated.

Puck Me Up

I think articles like this one of the main reasons many battered women stay quite about their abuse. It opens up a lot of doors for those who refuse to believe Varly is guilty on any level and it places the alleged victim in an unfavorable light as being nothing more than a gold digger. Even if she’s looking to seek compensation for interviews, does that automatically mean she’s making up these allegations? Why the hell should the media and sports magazines benefit from someone else’s pain without compensation?

Quite frankly, I’m appalled at that fact the there are so many people trying to turn the tables and make Varly the victim here. He very well could be innocent of the charge before him and I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until I learn otherwise. However, based on the probable cause warrant that this very newspaper decided to share with us online, there was at least enough evidence for the police to make the determination that it was at least LIKELY that Varly did these things. Plus, let’s not forget the fact that the D.A.’s office will ONLY accept cases that they believe they can prosecute based on the police investigation. I think it’s time to suspend these articles until more facts are available.

I wonder if this comment will be approved by your moderators.

Jimbotronn

Agreed 100%. So many are pretty much demanding that nobody question Varlamov, stating “innocent until proven guilty!” at the slightest, but many of those will turn right around and call the girlfriend a liar, a slut, a gold-digger… with no more proof of any of that than what’s been presented against Varlamov.

She may well be just a greedy woman who got dumped and wants to get back at him through his wallet… that certainly does happen and the women who do it take advantage of a system built to protect the real victims. But you know what happens, far, FAR more often than that? A man beats his girlfriend or wife and then makes her feel like she did something to deserve it. People who are making these kinds of comments about he girlfriend are just helping to perpetuate that problem.

LiLi

(I’m going to keep posting my response to this comment until I see it here. I don’t think there is nothing insulting so why not post it?)

First, so far all of the articles haven’t question her credibility and I don’t think this one does. They didn’t even address the interview of her friend accusing her of being the drunk and aggressive one. I asked why and so far no response. Second, why not question the “victim”? You can’t just send a man to jail because a woman claims she got beaten when she could have done the harm herself or attacked the man first. Even if there are bruises there still no evidence that he cause the harm or that if he even attempted to harm her.

“Even if she’s looking to seek compensation for interviews…”

No, but for someone who said “I want everyone to know the real Varlamov” she shouldn’t be putting obstacles to be heard. If she needs money to keep going with this she could have said so instead of pretending she is not trying to make money out of this. Also, why not ask help from organizations that help women? Maybe because the majority of the donations would go straight to her defense and not herself? If she did this then I don’t know why she needs to ask for money unless she is not satisfied with the help.

‘However, based on the probable cause warrant that this very newspaper decided to share with us online, there was at least enough evidence for the police to make the determination that it was at least LIKELY that Varly did these things.”

Women can go there without any physical evidence and just say he hurt her and that’s it. Court awaits you.

“Plus, let’s not forget the fact that the D.A.’s office will ONLY accept cases that they believe they can prosecute based on the police investigation.”

Yes, that’s why they dropped her fake kidnapping allegations.

(Now, let see if this is approved)

Jimbotronn

There were no “fake kidnapping allegations.” The girlfriend told the police what happened and based on that it was the police, not the accuser, who decided what charges to issue the arrest warrant for. The fact that the DA ultimately decided to not charge Varlamov with kidnapping does not mean that anything was “faked,” it only means that after a closer look at the evidence they decided it either was not the correct charge, or it was not provable in court.

As far as your other comments, it’s extremely unlikely that the DA is going to court based only on this woman’s story and “without physical evidence.” DV cases are among the most difficult to win and if there were not enough evidence to have a good chance at conviction, it’s very likely all the charges would have been dropped. The fact that the assault charge remains should tell us that either something did happen that night, or that the victim and her lawyer have constructed a lie so complex and thorough that they’ve fooled the professionals trained to weed out things like that. Frankly, neither the victim or her lawyer strike me as bright enough to pull that off.

LiLi

She was asked what happened that night and based on that the charges were made… but is not like the “kidnapping” happened that night and if it were then when in this world the word kidnapping means throwing out your ex girlfriend from your house? If I’m correct the kidnapping charge is from another alleged incident on a different day so I don’t see how that’s related to what happened that night. The police could only come out with such conclusion because she brought out the story and insinuated the kidnapping in the first place.

“it’s extremely unlikely that the DA is going to court based only on this woman’s story…”

Well, I read about how you can get a third-degree assault charge and it made it clear that you can still get charge with barely or without visible physical evidence as long as you claim to have suffered some sort of physical pain. Of course being charge and being sentenced guilty or not guilty are two different things and I suppose it will be more difficult to win if you don’t have physical evidence. In Varlamov’s case I do believe she has physical “evidence” however, like I said how do we know if he caused the harm? How do we know if it was a fight that she could have started? Now, this seems to be a possibility with the new things that have come out. We will see.

shaker

You know what really sucks about this entire thing(from a selfish perspective) is that we finally have a team that’s coming together,learning to play well and consistently,that is doing a lot of good things and we’re stuck talking about this. Again,from a selfish perspective,I almost wish they would settle and be done with it all.

Kizla Bites Pillows

Nothing of any significance will come from this case. It is a misdemeanor and that’s that. Regardless of the outcome, it simply won’t matter in a year or two. You can argue that point all you want and I’ll be waiting here in a year to say I told you so.

Even with a guilty plea, mark my words: Varly will still be an Av. I’m not saying that any of it is cool. This is just the way it is. To think it will change is to bark at the moon.

Sigmund Fred

Why I can’t stop thinking about the Kanye West song…

LT

She and her lawyer have every right to charge for interviews. The media is going to make money off reporting the stories by selling magazines, etc….why shouldn’t the subject of the story make money too?

Hobbes09

They do have every right, and we have every right to question the morality of it. This is a man’s future at stake, and she;s charging people to hear her side of how bad he is. Her very very biased side. Once he’s been found guilty, fine, sell your book like every other person in the world seems to be doing. But while it’s in the courts hands, she should not be selling her side. I’m against her even having all these interviews in the first place, as their a blatant attempt to sway public opinion in her favour. This amplifies the chance he gets convicted, or at the very least, that he’s forced to settle out of court. If he’s tried by a jury of his peers, and they’ve all already heard her story or seen her interviews, where she was not under oath and had no fear of cross examination from an opposing lawyer, then they’re already tainted jurors. Although I have to admit, besides law and order shows, I’m not fluid in how the American justice system works, so maybe there wont be a jury.

Terry Frei graduated from Wheat Ridge High School in the Denver area and has degrees in history and journalism from the University of Colorado-Boulder. He worked for the Rocky Mountain News while attending CU and joined the Post staff after graduation. He has also worked at the Oregonian in Portland, Ore., and The Sporting News. His seventh book, March 1939: Before the Madness, was issued in February 2014.

Chambers covers college and professional hockey for The Denver Post. He has written for the Post since 1994, after dumping his first 9-to-5 office job a couple years out of college. He primarily follows the University of Denver hockey team and helps cover the Avalanche.